Subject: Re: bug#25129: 26.0.50; seq-some function

From: Pierre Lorenzon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 17:28:42 +0100 (CET)

From: Nicolas Petton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: bug#25129: 26.0.50; seq-some function
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 09:48:29 +0100

> Pierre Lorenzon <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> Hi Pierre,
> 
>> I well understand now that I must use seq-find instead of
>> seq-some but I think that I will not be the only one being
>> confused by these functions specifications !
> 
> There is a mistake (extra if) in the documentation, I will fix that.
  Good !

> 
> Other than that, is the following less confusing?
> 
>   Return non-nil if PRED returns non-nil for at least one element of SEQUENCE.
>   If so, return the value returned by PRED.

    Yes this is absolutely clear now from my point of view.

    I know taht this function has been first called seq-some-p
    then seq-(some and its spec has maybe changed as well. But
    now with your new documentation I htink that documentation
    fit function behavior. That's only what we need. The fact
    that function fit our own need is another question : in
    fact seq-find does !

    Thanks !

    Pierre 
> Cheers,
> Nico